Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 1469-1470 [2011-216]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 6 / Monday, January 10, 2011 / Notices
1469
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Andrew L. Bates,
Acting Secretary of the Commission.
Attachment 1—General Target
Schedule for Processing and Resolving
Requests for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information in This Proceeding
Day
Event/activity
0 ........................
Publication of Federal Register notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, including order with instructions for access requests.
Deadline for submitting requests for access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) with information:
Supporting the standing of a potential party identified by name and address; describing the need for the information in order
for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding.
Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) Demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions whose formulation
does not require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 requestor/petitioner reply).
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff informs the requestor of the staff’s determination whether the request for access
provides a reasonable basis to believe standing can be established and shows need for SUNSI. (NRC staff also informs
any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information.) If NRC staff makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins document processing
(preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents).
If NRC staff finds no ‘‘need’’ or no likelihood of standing, the deadline for requestor/petitioner to file a motion seeking a ruling
to reverse the NRC staff’s denial of access; NRC staff files copy of access determination with the presiding officer (or Chief
Administrative Judge or other designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff finds ‘‘need’’ for SUNSI, the deadline for any
party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information to
file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s grant of access.
Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s).
(Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete information processing and
file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to file Non-Disclosure
Agreement for SUNSI.
If access granted: Issuance of presiding officer or other designated officer decision on motion for protective order for access
to sensitive information (including schedule for providing access and submission of contentions) or decision reversing a
final adverse determination by the NRC staff.
Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI consistent with decision issuing the protective order.
Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. However, if more than 25 days
remain between the petitioner’s receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as
established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later
deadline.
(Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI.
(Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers.
Decision on contention admission.
10 ......................
60 ......................
20 ......................
25 ......................
30 ......................
40 ......................
A .......................
A + 3 .................
A + 28 ...............
A + 53 ...............
A + 60 ...............
> A + 60 ...........
Cliffs), located in Calvert County,
Maryland. Therefore, as required by 10
CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this
environmental assessment and finding
of no significant impact.
[FR Doc. 2011–215 Filed 1–7–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Environmental Assessment
[Docket Nos. 50–317 and 50–318; NRC–
2011–0004]
Identification of the Proposed Action
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant,
LLC; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power
Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) is considering issuance of an
exemption from Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 50.46 and
10 CFR part 50, appendix K, for Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR–53 and
DPR–69, issued to Calvert Cliffs Nuclear
Power Plant, LLC, the licensee, for
operation of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear
Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Calvert
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:19 Jan 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
The proposed action would provide
an exemption from the requirements of:
(1) 10 CFR 50.46, ‘‘Acceptance criteria
for emergency core cooling systems for
light-water nuclear power reactors,’’
which requires that the calculated
emergency core cooling system (ECCS)
performance for reactors with zircaloy
or ZIRLO fuel cladding meet certain
criteria, and (2) 10 CFR part 50,
appendix K, ‘‘ECCS Evaluation Models,’’
which presumes the use of zircaloy or
ZIRLO fuel cladding when doing
calculations for energy release, cladding
oxidation, and hydrogen generation
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
after a postulated loss-of coolantaccident.
The proposed action would allow the
licensee to use M5, an advanced alloy
fuel cladding material for pressurizedwater reactors (PWRs), in lieu of
zircaloy or ZIRLO, the materials
assumed to be used in the cited
regulations, at Calvert Cliffs. The
proposed action is in accordance with
the licensee’s application dated
November 23, 2009 (Agencywide
Document Access and Management
System (ADAMS) Accession No.
ML093350189).
The Need for the Proposed Action
The Commission’s regulations in 10
CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR part 50,
appendix K require the demonstration
of adequate ECCS performance for lightwater reactors that contain fuel
consisting of uranium oxide pellets
enclosed in zircaloy or ZIRLO tubes.
Each of these regulations, either
E:\FR\FM\10JAN1.SGM
10JAN1
1470
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 6 / Monday, January 10, 2011 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
implicitly or explicitly, assumes that
either zircaloy or ZIRLO is used as the
fuel rod cladding material.
In order to accommodate the high fuel
rod burnups that are required for
modern fuel management and core
designs, Framatome developed the M5
advanced fuel rod cladding material. M5
is an alloy comprised primarily of
zirconium (∼99 percent) and niobium
(∼1 percent) that has demonstrated
superior corrosion resistance and
reduced irradiation-induced growth
relative to both standard and low-tin
zircaloy. However, since the chemical
composition of the M5 advanced alloy
differs from the specifications of either
zircaloy or ZIRLO, use of the M5
advanced alloy falls outside of the strict
interpretation of these regulations.
Therefore, approval of this exemption
request is needed to permit the use of
the M5 advanced alloy as a fuel rod
cladding material at Calvert Cliffs.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its
environmental assessment of the
proposal to use M5 advanced alloy for
fuel rod cladding at Calvert Cliffs and
has concluded that the proposed
exemption will not present any undue
risk to public health and safety. The
underlying purposes of 10 CFR 50.46
and 10 CFR part 50, appendix K, are to
ensure that facilities have adequate
acceptance criteria for the ECCS, and to
ensure that cladding oxidation and
hydrogen generation are appropriately
limited during a loss-of-coolant accident
(LOCA) and conservatively accounted
for in the ECCS evaluation model,
respectively. Topical Report (TR) BAW–
10227P, ‘‘Evaluation of Advanced
Cladding and Structural Material (M5)
in PWR Reactor Fuel,’’ which was
approved by the NRC on February 4,
2000, demonstrated that the
effectiveness of the ECCS will not be
affected by a change from zircaloy to
M5. In addition, TR BAW–10227P
demonstrated that the Baker-Just
equation (used in the ECCS evaluation
model to determine the rate of energy
release, cladding oxidation, and
hydrogen generation) is conservative in
all post-LOCA scenarios with respect to
M5 advanced alloy as a fuel rod
cladding material or in other assembly
structural components. The licensee
will use NRC-approved methods for the
reload design process for Calvert Cliffs
reloads with M5. The details of the
staff’s safety evaluation will be provided
in the exemption that will be issued as
part of the letter to the licensee
approving the exemption to the
regulation, if granted.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:19 Jan 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
The proposed action will not
significantly increase the probability or
consequences of accidents. No changes
are being made in the types of effluents
that may be released offsite. There is no
significant increase in the amount of
any effluent released offsite. There is no
significant increase in occupational or
public radiation exposure. Therefore,
there are no significant radiological
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
The proposed action does not result
in changes to land use or water use, or
result in changes to the quality or
quantity of non-radiological effluents.
No changes to the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System permit
are needed. No effects on the aquatic or
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the
plant, or to threatened, endangered, or
protected species under the Endangered
Species Act, or impacts to essential fish
habitat covered by the MagnusonStevens Act are expected. There are no
impacts to the air or ambient air quality.
There are no impacts to historical and
cultural resources. There would be no
noticeable effect on socioeconomic
conditions in the region. Therefore, no
changes or different types of nonradiological environmental impacts are
expected as a result of the proposed
action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that
there are no significant environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed
action, the staff considered denial of the
proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’
alternative). Denial of the application
would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. The
environmental impacts of the proposed
action and the alternative action are
similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of
any different resources than those
previously considered in the Final
Environmental Statement for Calvert
Cliffs dated April 1973, and the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant
(NUREG–1437, Supplement 1), dated
October 1999.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on November 29, 2010, the staff
consulted with the Maryland State
official, Susan Gray of the Maryland
Department of Natural Resources,
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
regarding the environmental impact of
the proposed action. The State official
had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental
assessment, the NRC concludes that the
proposed action will not have a
significant effect on the quality of the
human environment. Accordingly, the
NRC has determined not to prepare an
environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
For further details with respect to the
proposed action, see the licensee’s letter
dated November 23, 2009 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML093350189).
Documents may be examined, and/or
copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, Public File Area O1
F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available
records will be accessible electronically
from the Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading
Room on the Internet at the NRC Web
site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. Persons who do not have
access to ADAMS or who encounter
problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS should contact the
NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone
at 1–800–397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or
send an e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day
of January 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Douglas V. Pickett,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch I–1, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2011–216 Filed 1–7–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT
CORPORATION
Sunshine Act Notice
OPIC Annual Public Hearing
OPIC’s Sunshine Act notice of its
Annual Public Hearing was published
in the Federal Register (Volume 75,
Number 236, Page 76758) on December
9, 2010. No requests were received to
provide testimony or submit written
statements for the record; therefore,
OPIC’s Annual Public Hearing
scheduled for 3:30 p.m., January 20,
2011 has been cancelled.
Contact Person for Information:
Information on the hearing cancellation
may be obtained from Connie M. Downs
at (202) 336–8438, via facsimile at (202)
E:\FR\FM\10JAN1.SGM
10JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 6 (Monday, January 10, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1469-1470]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-216]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318; NRC-2011-0004]
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear
Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Environmental Assessment and Finding of
No Significant Impact
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of
an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)
50.46 and 10 CFR part 50, appendix K, for Facility Operating License
Nos. DPR-53 and DPR-69, issued to Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant,
LLC, the licensee, for operation of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power
Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Calvert Cliffs), located in Calvert County,
Maryland. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing
this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would provide an exemption from the
requirements of: (1) 10 CFR 50.46, ``Acceptance criteria for emergency
core cooling systems for light-water nuclear power reactors,'' which
requires that the calculated emergency core cooling system (ECCS)
performance for reactors with zircaloy or ZIRLO fuel cladding meet
certain criteria, and (2) 10 CFR part 50, appendix K, ``ECCS Evaluation
Models,'' which presumes the use of zircaloy or ZIRLO fuel cladding
when doing calculations for energy release, cladding oxidation, and
hydrogen generation after a postulated loss-of coolant-accident.
The proposed action would allow the licensee to use M5, an advanced
alloy fuel cladding material for pressurized-water reactors (PWRs), in
lieu of zircaloy or ZIRLO, the materials assumed to be used in the
cited regulations, at Calvert Cliffs. The proposed action is in
accordance with the licensee's application dated November 23, 2009
(Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No.
ML093350189).
The Need for the Proposed Action
The Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR part 50,
appendix K require the demonstration of adequate ECCS performance for
light-water reactors that contain fuel consisting of uranium oxide
pellets enclosed in zircaloy or ZIRLO tubes. Each of these regulations,
either
[[Page 1470]]
implicitly or explicitly, assumes that either zircaloy or ZIRLO is used
as the fuel rod cladding material.
In order to accommodate the high fuel rod burnups that are required
for modern fuel management and core designs, Framatome developed the M5
advanced fuel rod cladding material. M5 is an alloy comprised primarily
of zirconium (~99 percent) and niobium (~1 percent) that has
demonstrated superior corrosion resistance and reduced irradiation-
induced growth relative to both standard and low-tin zircaloy. However,
since the chemical composition of the M5 advanced alloy differs from
the specifications of either zircaloy or ZIRLO, use of the M5 advanced
alloy falls outside of the strict interpretation of these regulations.
Therefore, approval of this exemption request is needed to permit the
use of the M5 advanced alloy as a fuel rod cladding material at Calvert
Cliffs.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its environmental assessment of the proposal
to use M5 advanced alloy for fuel rod cladding at Calvert Cliffs and
has concluded that the proposed exemption will not present any undue
risk to public health and safety. The underlying purposes of 10 CFR
50.46 and 10 CFR part 50, appendix K, are to ensure that facilities
have adequate acceptance criteria for the ECCS, and to ensure that
cladding oxidation and hydrogen generation are appropriately limited
during a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) and conservatively accounted
for in the ECCS evaluation model, respectively. Topical Report (TR)
BAW-10227P, ``Evaluation of Advanced Cladding and Structural Material
(M5) in PWR Reactor Fuel,'' which was approved by the NRC on February
4, 2000, demonstrated that the effectiveness of the ECCS will not be
affected by a change from zircaloy to M5. In addition, TR BAW-10227P
demonstrated that the Baker-Just equation (used in the ECCS evaluation
model to determine the rate of energy release, cladding oxidation, and
hydrogen generation) is conservative in all post-LOCA scenarios with
respect to M5 advanced alloy as a fuel rod cladding material or in
other assembly structural components. The licensee will use NRC-
approved methods for the reload design process for Calvert Cliffs
reloads with M5. The details of the staff's safety evaluation will be
provided in the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to
the licensee approving the exemption to the regulation, if granted.
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of
effluents that may be released offsite. There is no significant
increase in the amount of any effluent released offsite. There is no
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure.
Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts
associated with the proposed action.
The proposed action does not result in changes to land use or water
use, or result in changes to the quality or quantity of non-
radiological effluents. No changes to the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System permit are needed. No effects on the aquatic or
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the plant, or to threatened,
endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or
impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Stevens Act
are expected. There are no impacts to the air or ambient air quality.
There are no impacts to historical and cultural resources. There would
be no noticeable effect on socioeconomic conditions in the region.
Therefore, no changes or different types of non-radiological
environmental impacts are expected as a result of the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
Denial of the application would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action
and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for
Calvert Cliffs dated April 1973, and the Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear
Power Plant (NUREG-1437, Supplement 1), dated October 1999.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on November 29, 2010, the
staff consulted with the Maryland State official, Susan Gray of the
Maryland Department of Natural Resources, regarding the environmental
impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined
not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed
action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated November 23, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML093350189). Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at
the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically
from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site,
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by
telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to
pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of January 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Douglas V. Pickett,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-1, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2011-216 Filed 1-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
